BankSimple invites first customers; rebrands itself as Simple • Hacker News Board

Re: BankSimple invites first customers; rebrands itself as Simple

#181

Post by eavc » Tue, Nov 08, 2011, 7:37 PM UTC

lhnn wrote: post #131

al3x wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry that you think the name is "weak" and "generic", but I'm glad that you get what we're doing. "Simple" is definitely a generic term, but brands are built over time. Personally, I love our new logo (by our own @3n), and I think it'll resonate when you start seeing it on actual debit cards and such :)

It's easy to talk shit on the Internet... Obviously, I support your business idea, and I look forward to it shaking banks up a bit. If the product is strong enough, a generic brand won't kill the business. I still believe BankSimple was a better name (in my opinion), as it actually positioned you as a new player in a game to change the status quo. I can understand if there were potential legal issues with a non-bank…

My thinking is that an innovative, abstract replacement for banking will either float or sink on the strength of its offering and subsequent word-of-mouth. My mother wouldn't ever sign up for this on her own regardless of what it's called, but in time, I might be able to get her to use it if it's good. A descriptive brand name is almost irrelevant for a company like this.

Now, the other angle here is that banking might simply be their entree into the abstraction business at large. So maybe today I bank through Simple, but in a few years I buy insurance through them. And maybe my cell phone plan.

There's a lot of confusion and noise interfering with the efficiency of consumer markets as mediums of value exchange. Abstraction, quantification, and objective selection could be a neat way to cut down on some of the inefficiency, misinformation, and confusion.

Re: BankSimple invites first customers; rebrands itself as Simple

#182

Post by al3x » Tue, Nov 08, 2011, 7:38 PM UTC

botker wrote: post #170

i2pi wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the naming of the account, it is a little more complicated. Everyone gets, at least, two accounts with us. One is a joint account, that is named 'Simple', but titled for the benefit of (FBO) our customers. But titling it such, all FDIC insurance flows through to the individual customers. In addition to the co-mingled account, everyone gets an individual interest baring account, which is directly titled in the name…

I wish Simple the best of success, but it seems clear that a more technically correct name for the company would be Complicated. I understand that your goal is to create the appearance of simplicity via complicated obfuscations. Those of us who are concerned about where our accounts live, and how they're structured, are not your prospective customers. So while I have no need for an invite, I wish you the best of succ…

The financial system is inherently complicated. Having an account with a traditional bank is no guarantee that your financial life will be free of intermediaries. Banks outsource everything from IT to customer support to marketing and fraud analytics. Unless you either run a bank or work with a very basic credit union, you probably don't have the full picture of what's going on with your bank accounts.

Banking with us does not obfuscate where your funds reside. It does, however, mean that you don't have to deal with a bank for support and technology issues. Instead, you get to deal with a company that's focused on those things rather than on managing a treasury, making loans, etc.

Re: BankSimple invites first customers; rebrands itself as Simple

#183

Post by mahyarm » Tue, Nov 08, 2011, 7:39 PM UTC

ironchef wrote: post #104

bradleyland wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no affiliation with Simple, but the relationship seems pretty straight forward. "Where" your money is becomes an abstraction. You hold an account with Simple, and are issued a Visa card with which you can access the funds in your account. Everything beyond that is transparent to you. The accounts would technically be "in your name", since the funds are yours, but you never have to interface with the other bank…

But pragmatically if they switch banks behind the scenes, that would usually require a hard credit pull every time it occurs. This would seem to hurt a person's credit score if that was what actually occurred (that's why the semantics are important).

Maybe the definition of a hard credit pull should be changed? It discourages people from shopping for loans since you often cant get a real interest rate quote until that provider gets your credit rating themselves anyways.

Re: BankSimple invites first customers; rebrands itself as Simple

#184

Post by al3x » Tue, Nov 08, 2011, 7:40 PM UTC

damoncali wrote: post #174

useflyer wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

psuedo-account numbers do not inspire confidence that my money is safe. please put a HOW IT WORKS section on your website and go into details, because this just seems insecure and shady

I dont' know if I'd call it shady, but it certainly seems more complicated than just opening a bank account.

The actual process of opening an account with us at least as straightforward as opening an account with a traditional bank, if not a bit simpler.

Re: BankSimple invites first customers; rebrands itself as Simple

#185

Post by al3x » Tue, Nov 08, 2011, 7:42 PM UTC

netmau5 wrote: post #176

I really like what you guys are trying to do here, but you still haven't made it more appealing than getting frequent flyer miles on my credit card. I know you want to use the normal card fees to make some cash, but why do you need those + deposit interest? My brick & mortar bank provides me with a free-to-use checking account w/debit card in exchange for the interest made off my deposits. My credit card, paid in ful…

There's a couple of outcomes I can see:

1. We just aren't the right banking service for you. 2. We find out that a lot of people are interested in rewards programs, and we come up with a really compelling one. We've addressed that briefly in our FAQ, FWIW.

Either way, thanks for your feedback.

Re: BankSimple invites first customers; rebrands itself as Simple

#186

Post by al3x » Tue, Nov 08, 2011, 7:44 PM UTC

inmygarage wrote: post #162

I wish Simple would consider supporting all ATMs, not just in-network ones. And by supporting, I mean reimbursing all ATM-related fees. Ally does this. Although Ally is a bank rather than a front-end-for-a-bank, this feature has become increasingly important to me as I find myself increasingly patronizing cash-only establishments.

We've explained in our FAQ why we don't do this currently: https://www.simple.com/faq/

Basically, reimbursing ATM fees is an illusion. They charge you over here and reimburse you over there. No net win for most consumers, unfortunately.

Re: BankSimple invites first customers; rebrands itself as Simple

#187

Post by mahyarm » Tue, Nov 08, 2011, 7:44 PM UTC

al3x wrote: post #98

Lewisham wrote: post #84

Did anyone else see this in the FAQ? Who can use Simple? To be eligible, you must: - Be a resident of the United States and over the age of 18; - Have a Social Security number; and - Own a smartphone (iPhone or Android). Do I really need to have a smartphone? Well, you need to have an iOS (version 4.2 or higher) or Android device. Android phones and iPhones are preferable so that you can deposit checks using your sma…

Hi, cofounder of Simple here. We require a smartphone for more than just mobile check deposit. We want people to have our app installed so we can use it for multifactor authentication, for example. We also want to do rich push notifications of account activity, and SMS (the only viable non-smartphone option for that) isn't a great experience. Today, there's still a bunch of people who don't have smartphones. But the…

Are you going to put limits on check amounts? The only checks I tend to get are payroll checks and often those are too big for most deposit by smartphone check deposit programs.

Re: BankSimple invites first customers; rebrands itself as Simple

#188

Post by al3x » Tue, Nov 08, 2011, 7:46 PM UTC

xradionut wrote: post #153

Unfortunately they need to make their web site cross-browser functional. Doesn't function well in IE8. I still have no idea why I would need their service. My current financial institutions provide awesome service without cryptic bs. Consumer banking and small business banking is simple to the moderately educated.

If you're happy with your current bank, you're probably not our target customer.

I think we're doing some stuff that's pretty different in terms of making your financial data easy to explore and helping you meet savings goals and automatically earn more interest. Those things might not be compelling to everyone, but a lot of people seem interested.

Re: BankSimple invites first customers; rebrands itself as Simple

#189

Post by kai-zer » Tue, Nov 08, 2011, 7:47 PM UTC

al3x wrote: post #32

cynicalkane wrote: post #3

I thought BankSimple was a great brand, because it tells you what it is and fits well with the current zeitgeist. What is "BankSimple?" A way to bank that's simple. Sounds interesting! Everyone hates how complicated banking is, right? Let's go to the website to find out more. What is "Simple?" Who knows. A website that has something to do with banking--or so I'm told--with yet another web 2.0 one-word "brand", a real…

The "Bank" in "BankSimple" was problematic for us. We're technically not a bank. We also don't want to be associated with the way people have approached banking, particularly in the US. Sorry you're not crazy about the new name, but we're happy with it. It gives us a lot of room to grow.

A non-bank entity cant have the word "Bank" in the name, but any other spelling is okay. BancSimple is legal.

The changed spelling is to indicate that it is not a bank and its accounts are not insured by the FDIC.

e.g. Banc of America Securities, U.S. Bancorp

Re: BankSimple invites first customers; rebrands itself as Simple

#190

Post by anonymoushn » Tue, Nov 08, 2011, 7:47 PM UTC

al3x wrote: post #30

buro9 wrote: post #16

I'm not sure I understand the proposition now. Who is the relationship with? As in... who has my money? I read it as them hiding that from you for simplicity... you get this one interface and customer service which is wonderful, but to achieve this they are the proxy to your bank? So... do they set up the bank accounts, or do you? Do you have the ability to go straight to your bank, or does Simple preclude that abili…

Hi, cofounder of Simple here. We work with partner banks who hold on to deposits. For all intents and purposes, you never have to think about who that partner bank is, but if you ever need to contact them directly, you'll know where your funds are. You might find our FAQ informative: https://www.simple.com/faq/ .

Can you tell us which banks in particular will be holding the deposits? I ask because I am interested in your product, but I do not want to do business with any bank that repeatedly forecloses on houses for which it holds no mortgage, hires mercenaries to commit the crime of breaking and entering, has a chief underwriter who has testified "Defective mortgages increased during 2007 to over 80 percent of production," or has admitted to over 100,000 instances of perjury. As such I'd like to be certain that you aren't doing business with Bank of America, Wells Fargo, or Citigroup before I open an account.